We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.

Hispanic leadership fund

The reversal of Van Hollen has rendered the pending disclosure case, Hispanic Leadership Fund v. FEC less pressing, though the awaited ruling could still clarify criteria for determining when a political ad triggers disclosure and reporting obligations with the FEC. The Hispanic Leadership Fund (HLF), which filed suit in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia on July 30, argues that the ads in question do not refer directly to a candidate, but instead to the "White House" and the "Administration," which should not trigger reporting requirements. The ads also contain audio of President Obama's voice, but do not name the speaker. The HLF, a 501(c)(4) organization, is seeking protection from any enforcement action by the FEC if the group does not file FEC reports for the ads. Sponsors of electioneering communications must file reports to the FEC disclosing sources of receipts; the Hispanic Leadership Fund is claiming that because the ads do not mention a clearly identified candidate, that they do not qualify as electioneering communications and thus are not subject to reporting requirements.

In June, the FEC deadlocked on an Advisory Opinion addressing a similar situation, with the three Democratic commissioners saying that ads criticizing the "White House" and the "Administration" clearly target Obama, and the three Republican commissioners disagreeing. On October 4, the district court ruled that three of the ads were electioneering communications while two of the proposed ads were not. The district court also held that the electioneering provisions of the FECA are constitutional as applied to HLF's proposed ads.

Related topic hubs

Compare jurisdictions: Aviation

"The newsfeeds deliver us the most recent legal analysis and practical information. There seems to be a broad analysis which is beneficial to us in analyzing various areas of law. It provides a snap shot update of various legal developments and assists us in staying current. The articles are well covered and include the right amount of detail. The size and depth of articles are good too, so we can get to the information one needs very quickly. The articles are typically of high calibre and from high-calibre authors who provide sufficiently succinct articles so that one can learn much about new developments in a short amount of time. I like the format because it is easy to scan for relevant articles. It's a great tool. I like the fact you can tailor the newsfeeds by jurisdiction and work area, and only receive information relevant to your practice."